This is another example of why we are farked.Politicians do not do what constituents want.They do what big money wants, or they do something that will allow them to take in more of our cash so they can spend it on shiat constituents don't want.

You already have to pay tax on the items you buy from out of state vendors that do not collect sales tax if those items would be taxable in your state. Use tax, not sales tax is what it is called. I file my return and pay the tax quarterly as required by my state of residence, Florida.

If you live in Deleware, Montana or Oregon you have no state sales or use tax. All others should be paying their use tax as the law requires unless the vendor collects it.

This will not raise your tax burden one cent. It will however create an accounting nightmare for the sellers and many smaller sellers will simply close. Those that remain open will have higher tax compliance costs and will pass those costs along to the consumer.

If you people had paid your taxes all along like you're supposed to you wouldn't be facing this problem. Quill v. North Dakota was not litigated to save you from paying the tax you rightfully owe, it was litigated so Quill and retailers similarly situated wouldn't be required to comply with tax laws in jurisdictions in which they have no nexus.

TLDR version - you already owe these taxes, you don't pay them. Now they want businesses to collect them because you won't pay voluntarily and prices will go up. Pay your taxes deadbeats.

I don't have a problem with this. It'll cut down on really blatant tax evasion, that's it. And smaller companies won't have to "deal with 9,000 tax codes" or anything like that. Some vendor will see a business opportunity to run all that stuff for a small surcharge and all the small businesses will just contract through them.

AdolfOliverPanties:This is another example of why we are farked.Politicians do not do what constituents want.They do what big money wants, or they do something that will allow them to take in more of our cash so they can spend it on shiat constituents don't want.

I haven't studied the issue thoroughly here, but neither of those two things seem to apply. Big money would rather transactions be tax free so the price is lower and they, in theory, sell more. And the politicians that passed this (at the national level) will never see any of this money, so they don't get to spend it.

Their constituents might not like it, but it doesn't seem like they had big money or their own spending proclivities in mind either.

Thoguh:I don't have a problem with this. It'll cut down on really blatant tax evasion, that's it. And smaller companies won't have to "deal with 9,000 tax codes" or anything like that. Some vendor will see a business opportunity to run all that stuff for a small surcharge and all the small businesses will just contract through them.

Smaller companies won't have to deal with it at all. It excuses all companies with less than one million in online sales.

feckingmorons:You already have to pay tax on the items you buy from out of state vendors that do not collect sales tax if those items would be taxable in your state. Use tax, not sales tax is what it is called. I file my return and pay the tax quarterly as required by my state of residence, Florida.

If you live in Deleware, Montana or Oregon you have no state sales or use tax. All others should be paying their use tax as the law requires unless the vendor collects it.

This will not raise your tax burden one cent. It will however create an accounting nightmare for the sellers and many smaller sellers will simply close. Those that remain open will have higher tax compliance costs and will pass those costs along to the consumer.

If you people had paid your taxes all along like you're supposed to you wouldn't be facing this problem. Quill v. North Dakota was not litigated to save you from paying the tax you rightfully owe, it was litigated so Quill and retailers similarly situated wouldn't be required to comply with tax laws in jurisdictions in which they have no nexus.

TLDR version - you already owe these taxes, you don't pay them. Now they want businesses to collect them because you won't pay voluntarily and prices will go up. Pay your taxes deadbeats.

Realistically, you realize, almost no one actually pays the the use tax. The chances of getting caught for not doing it are infinitesimally small, and for more expensive items, it's one of the biggest draws to purchasing online. This will, in effect, be an additional tax for most online purchases for most people.

The only people I can think of who are currently "evading" taxes are eBay sellers who sell to in-state buyers and don't add on tax. For eBay, this is a big hassle, but for Amazon, it frees them to set up an even better distribution system.

Raise your hand if you answered $0 when your state tax return asked the dollar amount of out of state or online purchases that you owed taxes on.

*raises hand*

Now, how many of you were willing to pay those taxes, but just had no f*cking clue how to go about figuring out exactly what you need to pay, therefore you broke the law and evaded the taxes because you know you'll never get caught?

*raises hand*

This is why I'm OK with business collecting them. Because if you leave it up to me, sh*t isn't going to get done. I'm lazy and unorganized. But I am willing to pay it if it doesn't involve another step in filing my tax returns, and possibly getting audited.

feckingmorons:You already have to pay tax on the items you buy from out of state vendors that do not collect sales tax if those items would be taxable in your state. Use tax, not sales tax is what it is called. I file my return and pay the tax quarterly as required by my state of residence, Florida.

If you live in Deleware, Montana or Oregon you have no state sales or use tax. All others should be paying their use tax as the law requires unless the vendor collects it.

This will not raise your tax burden one cent. It will however create an accounting nightmare for the sellers and many smaller sellers will simply close. Those that remain open will have higher tax compliance costs and will pass those costs along to the consumer.

If you people had paid your taxes all along like you're supposed to you wouldn't be facing this problem. Quill v. North Dakota was not litigated to save you from paying the tax you rightfully owe, it was litigated so Quill and retailers similarly situated wouldn't be required to comply with tax laws in jurisdictions in which they have no nexus.

TLDR version - you already owe these taxes, you don't pay them. Now they want businesses to collect them because you won't pay voluntarily and prices will go up. Pay your taxes deadbeats.

Catalog sales have traditionally been excluded from the state and local sales taxes. (with the exception that the sale company has a physical store in your state). (and I should say most states as some paper catalogs add taxes to certain states).

It seems this law is redefining what a 'physical store' is..meaning a internet store that takes over the internet is subject.

My question would be does the company that collects such state taxes on internet sells actually give those to the state and what gaggle of oversight to look at those sales would be in place. If I order a item and pay 20 cents in state tax---is that state tax actually going to the state each year? Would this also conflict with interstate commerce----would your hammocks you purchased in Mexico be subject to federal tax? After you reach the duty free limit? Or do you ignore that and just go on through customs?

It would be intresting to see if called up the store on the phone instead of using 'internet' which law would apply?

feckingmorons:You already have to pay tax on the items you buy from out of state vendors that do not collect sales tax if those items would be taxable in your state. Use tax, not sales tax is what it is called. I file my return and pay the tax quarterly as required by my state of residence, Florida.

If you live in Deleware, Montana or Oregon you have no state sales or use tax. All others should be paying their use tax as the law requires unless the vendor collects it.

This will not raise your tax burden one cent. It will however create an accounting nightmare for the sellers and many smaller sellers will simply close. Those that remain open will have higher tax compliance costs and will pass those costs along to the consumer.

If you people had paid your taxes all along like you're supposed to you wouldn't be facing this problem. Quill v. North Dakota was not litigated to save you from paying the tax you rightfully owe, it was litigated so Quill and retailers similarly situated wouldn't be required to comply with tax laws in jurisdictions in which they have no nexus.

TLDR version - you already owe these taxes, you don't pay them. Now they want businesses to collect them because you won't pay voluntarily and prices will go up. Pay your taxes deadbeats.

Bullcrap. Software and apps exist now to do the calculations and filing for you. Way esier for the seller to do this than for individual purchasers.

All this does is help to ever so slightly level the playing field between brick and mortar retailers and online only stores. those cheap prices come at the expense of retail jobs, property taxes and commerical rents.

And the warehouse jobs are notoriously bad even when compared to other warehouse jobs.

So, if I buy something online. The vendor/store isn't in my state. The company that I have my credit card with doesn't reside in my state. The company that processes the credit card to pay the vendor doesn't reside in my state. Question: what entitles my state to even one penny of that transaction? If I cross a state border and buy a sandwich, I don't pay my home state sales tax on it. This isn't the same thing how?

AdolfOliverPanties:This is another example of why we are farked.Politicians do not do what constituents want.They do what big money wants, or they do something that will allow them to take in more of our cash so they can spend it on shiat constituents don't want.

But this is what the inbred hillbilly constituents of republican legislators want. they ain't got no high fallutin' com-puters or fancy pants credit cards. They cash their paychecks at wal-mart and do their shopping right there like real 'muricans, con sarn it!

We need to pass a bill that requires brick and mortar retailers to hold onto a product for two days (i.e. shipping time) before a customer can pick up their item in order to create equality between retailers & etailers.

feckingmorons:You already have to pay tax on the items you buy from out of state vendors that do not collect sales tax if those items would be taxable in your state. Use tax, not sales tax is what it is called. I file my return and pay the tax quarterly as required by my state of residence, Florida.

If you live in Deleware, Montana or Oregon you have no state sales or use tax. All others should be paying their use tax as the law requires unless the vendor collects it.

This will not raise your tax burden one cent. It will however create an accounting nightmare for the sellers and many smaller sellers will simply close. Those that remain open will have higher tax compliance costs and will pass those costs along to the consumer.

If you people had paid your taxes all along like you're supposed to you wouldn't be facing this problem. Quill v. North Dakota was not litigated to save you from paying the tax you rightfully owe, it was litigated so Quill and retailers similarly situated wouldn't be required to comply with tax laws in jurisdictions in which they have no nexus.

TLDR version - you already owe these taxes, you don't pay them. Now they want businesses to collect them because you won't pay voluntarily and prices will go up. Pay your taxes deadbeats.

Damn right. Personally I buy all my stuff from Best Buy, anyway, because it has far less stuff than amazon does at twice the price, and I get to take it home right then. Amazon should have to pay tax on top of the shipping costs because it isn't fair.

Thoguh:I don't have a problem with this. It'll cut down on really blatant tax evasion, that's it. And smaller companies won't have to "deal with 9,000 tax codes" or anything like that. Some vendor will see a business opportunity to run all that stuff for a small surcharge and all the small businesses will just contract through them.

Or every single credit card gateway company will do it as part of their service. This will be transparent to businesses.

This is good news for web developers in foreign countries who will be hired for a fraction of the cost of U.S. web developers to update various merchants' stores to be compliant with the new tax regulations if this becomes law!

Yeah, this shouldn't affect the people who the article seems to say it's going to affect - it's only for businesses that pull in a cool mil in online sales per year. Most small businesses I know are never going to even get into the ballpark for that kind of game.